Exploring "God, Freedom, and Human Dignity" with Ron Highfield

Seaver Professor of Religion, Ron Highfield, published his new book God, Freedom and Human Dignity: Embracing a God-Centered Identity in a Me-Centered
Culture in February of this year. Pepperdine Research caught up with him to discuss his research
and inspiration for his recent book...

PR: In your book, you address big themes and fears that have haunted the human psyche
for quite some time. What inspired or motivated you to write this book? Has it been
something you have been thinking about or planning for a long time?

Ron Highfield: This book finds its origin in my two teaching/research interests, (1) the intersection
between Christianity and secular culture, and (2) theological reflection on issues
facing the church today. As I wrote my previous book, Great is the Lord (Eerdmans, 2008; 467 pages), which falls into category (2), I kept thinking about
the problem of the relationship between God and human freedom and dignity. This issue
has been discussed by theologians and philosophers for 2,500 years. I began to see
that this problem makes itself felt in popular culture as unspoken fear that the existence
and activity of God may pose a threat to our freedom and dignity. I wrote this book
to show the ways in which this fear shapes how secular culture views God and to show
how the Christian view of God overcomes these fears. I argue that instead of being
a threat to human freedom and dignity God is their securest foundation and the greatest
hope of their glorious fulfillment.

PR: How does this book differ from your past scholarship?

RH: In many ways God, Freedom & Human Dignity continues my theological research program of the last 15 years. It addresses a significant
theological problem at a high level in dialogue with the best theologians and philosophers,
ancient and modern. It differs in at least three ways: (1) I address the problem of
the way secular culture (rather than the church) thinks of God and humanity, (2) the
target audience is those influenced by this secular vision and the theological students
and practicing ministers who minister to them, and (3) these limitations influence
the smaller size of the book (227 pages) and the less ponderous and less argumentative
style of the book.

PR: Modernity and its psychological influences are central to your argument about the
internal struggle humans face in confronting and accepting God today. The crux of
this struggle lies in the human need for (and even exaltation of) autonomy when it
is juxtaposed with or seemingly undermined by a belief in God. Could you discuss
your concept of a "me-centered culture" and how you see people grappling with religion
in a different way now than in past decades?

RH: By designating our culture as "me-centered" I don't mean that it is especially selfishness
or narcissistic; rather, I mean that it teaches us that we should look exclusively
within the human self for our dignity, for guidance in our pursuit of happiness and
for how to treat others. It views self-expression and authenticity as sacred rights.
The "me-centered" culture instinctively recoils at the idea that we need guidance
in these areas from external authority. It views calls for adherence to moral law
and obedience to God as threats to autonomy, dignity, and freedom. It reacts to restrictions
on our search for happiness as the worst sort of hatred and cruelty. Clearly, presenting
the Christian message to our contemporaries confronts us with challenges not faced
by Christian thinkers even 50 years ago. In part, I wrote this book to explore ways
of communicating the meaning of Christianity in this new context.

PR: What kind of research are you currently working on?

RH: I am currently working on a book on the Christian doctrines of creation and providence.
This book will continue the trajectory began in Great is the Lord. Having treated the Christian doctrine of God, I am now thinking about what it means
to call God "the Creator" of the world and "Lord and Governor" of history. In dealing
with the idea of creation I want to take the focus off the "science and the Bible"
debate and replace it with thorough reflection on what I call the "God-creature" relation:
what does it mean to say that God gives being and form to the world? What does it
mean to say that creatures depend on God for their existence, form and life? These
profound questions have not received the attention in recent theology and popular
religion that they deserve. In this book I want to show the intimate connection between
the ideas of creation and providence. The concept that ties the two together is the
"God-creature" relation. Providence is a kind of continuing creation that aims at
bringing the world to its appointed end. In one sense the divine act of creation includes
all time and not merely a timeless beginning of time. In the course of this book I
will deal with the relationship between divine providence and human freedom and with
the problem of evil.

PR: What is the proper end of an academic vocation? Or how do you understand your research?

RH: Contemporary higher education ("the academy") seems to be very confused about
why it exists and what end it should pursue. The standard rhetoric (usually directed
at threats from outside the academy) argues that the academy should pursue "knowledge
for knowledge's sake." This ideal sees the scholar as an objective and disinterested
servant of truth who should receive complete academic freedom in the sacred name of
truth. On the other hand, as a matter of practice, scholars adopt many other ends:
political agendas, battles for cultural dominance, career advancement, reputation,
money, and other private goals. In my opinion, the "knowledge for knowledge's sake"
view is at best a methodological guide to keep us honest and fair in our research.
Understood in this sense, I honor it. But scholars are human beings and all human
beings serve ends beyond mere exercises in method. "Knowledge is power," said Francis
Bacon. And good people should direct power toward good ends. No human activity deserves
to be exempt from ethical scrutiny. Hence scholars are obligated to direct their research
toward good ends. Every scholar, whatever his or her religious stance, should direct
scholarship toward the good of humanity. As a Christian scholar I have a particular
understanding of human good, and all my theological research is directed toward that
good: that human beings should come to love God and their neighbors. For me, keeping
this end in mind unifies my role as a teacher of the young with my role as a researcher
in search of truth.

---

Ron Highfield is a Professor of Religion at Seaver College, where he has been teaching
for 24 years. Highfield earned his PhD from Rice University and is a Member and Elder
at the University Church of Christ.